Posted by Juan Non-Volokh:
Reconsidering Rendition:
Georgetown University's Daniel Byman [1]suggests that rendition is
poorly understood, particualrly by its most strident critics.
There is no question that renditions are a flawed instrument,
especially when used recklessly and without exploring other options
first. But it is a mistake to focus on the tool without
understanding the problem it is used to solve: What does the U.S.
government do when it has the opportunity to detain, question and
gain information from a suspected terrorist who isn't an American
citizen, but does not have enough evidence to bring charges against
the suspect in a U.S. court?
Rendition can be justified, Byman suggests, even if it presents the
risk of torture or other abuses.
Because renditions lie in that gray area between the rule of law
and the nation's security, a more honest debate about the practice
would serve the country well. Liberal voices must answer the
painful question of whether suspected terrorists who are not U.S.
citizens should be allowed to escape without hindrance when we have
some evidence of threat or wrongdoing, but not enough to try them
in U.S. courts. Conservatives, in turn, must confront the moral
problem of torture and the political consequences of angering our
allies. Only then can the worst abuses common to the program be
curbed without jettisoning an important counterterrorism
instrument.
The [2]whole piece is worth a read.
References
1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58301-2005Apr16?language=printer
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58301-2005Apr16?language=printer
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
